Saturday, 17 January 2009
Dave Pack has competition!
On an unconnected theme, here's a nice little article out of Salem, Arkansas that puts Herb Armstrong alongside his true soul mates.
But ya gotta hand it to that Joey Tkach guy, he sure is holding the post-Herbal WCG together. Well, sort of... didn't seem to help one pastor, whose story appears in The New Jersey Jewish News.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
31 comments:
The hook for all these false prophets is that they have information that none of the other prophets have had (i.e., they were all false, but I am a true prophet).
There are no prophets after Jesus' day. We don't need them.
Are Moriyah and Wesley Webster one and the same?
http://www.enotes.com/interracial-relationships-article/bible-does-prohibit-interracial-marriage
Wesley Webster is a writer and a minister in the Worldwide Church of God, an international Christian church based in Pasadena, California.
Wesley was listed at Brooklyn NY
before Joe T Sr died.
from today's WCG church site
*Pastor Locator
There are currently no pastors whose last names begin with webster.*
anoneemoose
How cool about the Webster family! It is always a pleasure to read about the various solutions people have found to the Armstrong problem. One would also hope, though, that in addition to their enthusiastic celebration of all the Jewish rituals, they also privately remember Jesus.
BB
Do not take too much comfort in these false predictions Jesus is coming at a time when we least expect it. Remember He warns us to watch and pray always. Because people have made false predications does not mesn He won't return.
“People tell me that because Obama won, it will throw racism aside” along with a focus on the issue, said Keturah. “I hope that is not what is going to happen; we still have a racial problem.”
Sometimes that racial problem is all in your head Keturah.
The more racist people are not "white". It's the folks who think everything that happens to them is caused by racism.
The thief and robber and drive-by shooter are not in prison because of their crimes but because of their race - it's those who say such things as that who have a racial problem.
"Because people have made false predications does not mesn He won't return."
You know, my life is so much better now that I don't sit around and contemplate when Jesus will return or when the great tribulation will start. I can't know it, so I don't stress over it.
Anonymous said...
Do not take too much comfort in these false predictions Jesus is coming at a time when we least expect it. Remember He warns us to watch and pray always.
Correction: He warned his followers in the first century to watch and declared that all things written would be fulfilled in their generation.
Because people have made false predications does not mesn He won't return.
It pretty much does mean exactly that, especially when it was Jesus and all the apostles who made those same false predictions for the first time.
check link, this prophet has a lot to say, 19th day of the Tenth month 5844 years after creation
January 17, 2009.
dumont
sighted moon,
competition
No, Anonymous 10:11, you are correct. However, what it means is that those who have given the false warnings or prophecies have trashed themselves, as far as God is concerned. They are totally unreliable because have spoken presumptuously. Don't expect any truth regarding prophecy to come from anyone within the Armstrong movement. That possible source has been burned since the movement was founded by a false prophet, and all within have been taught at his feet.
BB
My father believed fervently that HWA was right about 1975, and dreamed of fighting at the right hand of Christ in Armageddon. He had never seen blood flowing as deep as horses' bridles, and he couldn't wait.
His Armageddon came not with a bang, but a whimper. As 1972 slipped from the near future through the needle's eye of the present and faded into the recent past, he merely followed Armstrong's lead and adjusted the date of Armageddon's onset. Soon, successive mini-strokes of senile dementia chipped away at his memory until eventually his mind guttered out. It died a couple of years before his body did. I often wonder whether, up till then, the repeated neural insults ever gave him visions of trumpets, horsemen, many-headed beasts, the Great Whore of Babylon, and thrilling rivers of blood. If so, I am almost glad for him, in a perverse way.
But what I am gladdest about is that I completely ignored his advice, oft-repeated during the '60s, not to make any long-range plans--nothing extending beyond 1975. I had already decided during my two semesters at Ambassador College that the COG message was nothing but a crock. That there are still people who believe it continues to amaze me.
Retired Prof
Hmm. This is all too familiar. The Sabbath is so important for people that they worship the Sabbath Day and if Jesus gets in the way of them doing so, they are willing to cast Him aside so their tradition does not have to change.
I think I recall the scripture saying something about people worshiping days...
"You know, my life is so much better now that I don't sit around and contemplate when Jesus will return or when the great tribulation will start. I can't know it, so I don't stress over it."
You know, my life is so much better now that I know Jesus is a manufactured construction of those who perpetuate mythological beliefs. There is no such thing as the great tribulation, so I can't stress over it.
"Correction: He warned his followers in the first century to watch and declared that all things written would be fulfilled in their generation."
no Corky, that's not what He said at all.
He said that the generation that sees the things He said would happen would not pass away before His return. That generation could very well be ours.
"that in addition to their enthusiastic celebration of all the Jewish rituals, they also privately remember Jesus."
If they did, they would have gone with the Messianic Judaism movement. Quoting from the article:
"I could no longer be Christian and no longer preach Christianity."
Well, there's some debate as to whether we were ever Christian, or preached Christianity in the first place. But I highly, highly, highly doubt (especially based on the son's recounting of reading the Torah as "emotional" -- Jewish believers deify their scriptures) that they have anything to do with messianic belief systems any longer.
Now, that's not as a bad a thing as you want to make it out to be, Bob: "One is not to be saved by believing a man lived and died long ago at Jerusalem." (Gerard Winstanley)
So, even if they don't "take time privately to remember Jesus", don't discount them, Bob. Sounds like they did the best they could, with what little they were given. Which is all any of us can do, at the end of the day. Yourself included.
As for Anon Sun Jan 18, 05:56:00 PM, be careful: Your "godly Christian" anti-Semitism is shining through, loud and clear, again.
Anonymous said...
"Correction: He warned his followers in the first century to watch and declared that all things written would be fulfilled in their generation."
no Corky, that's not what He said at all.
He said that the generation that sees the things He said would happen would not pass away before His return. That generation could very well be ours.
Luk 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
Which "be the days of vengeance"?
The days he just described - the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, which occurred in 70 AD.
To the scribes and Pharisees Jesus supposedly said:
Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Mat 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
Of course, since none of the gospels were written before but only after 70 AD - it's not really a prophecy at all. It's fakery of the Nth degree is what it is and you fell for it like I did and billions of other have before us.
It's just like the Revelation book. It's about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple but it's written after the fact. The problem with it is that Jesus didn't come back to fulfill the last part of it.
Well, it's really not his fault - he's dead and can't come back.
CORKY might like to consider the following. He may not believe in the second coming, but surely must agree that 'all these things' have not yet taken place:
Mat 24:30 and then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
Mat 24:31 And he shall send forth his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Mat 24:32 Now from the fig tree learn her parable: when her branch is now become tender, and putteth forth its leaves, ye know that the summer is nigh;
Mat 24:33 even so ye also, when ye see all these things, know ye that he is nigh, even at the doors.
Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all these things be accomplished"
Anon "Time is short! Send it in!" might like to ponder that the scriptures s/h/it is quoting could also be read allegorically, or as similes for the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70AD.
Or would that stretch your mind too much, and limit your false profit's income?? (Where do you send your tithe money, anyway, Anon? Or are you on the receiving end instead?)
Absolutely PH, the metaphors used be the later christian writers of the gospels meant exactly the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.
The sun, moon and stars are metaphors for the temple, Jerusalem and the priesthood.
The whole idea is that christians are now the sons of god instead of the Israelites and the heirs of the promises made to Abraham.
IOW, the christians are the real Israel - whether Jew or gentile. That was Paul's idea, not my fault, don't blame me.
Anon wrote: "Jesus is coming at a time when we least expect it."
I don't expect Jesus to come today.
So, should I get ready for Him to come today? (like brushing my teeth every time I go and pee)
Or, if I brush my teeth for Jesus, does that really mean I expect him to come today, and that will actually delay his coming?
Good Lord, it's quite a pickle!
Anon 10:09,
That generation *did* pass away though...So what is your point?
Unless you have knowledge of a 2000 year old person you've been hiding that hasn't yet become worm food.
Let's think for a moment here, folks!
Assume for the moment that you are a Christian living in the late first century AD. In your community, St. John is much respected. After all, as the youngest of Jesus' disciples, and the only man who did not abandon Jesus throughout the crucifixion, he is now an old man, perhaps the last surviving direct witness to, and participant in the life of Jesus.
It is well past 70 AD, Jerusalem has fallen, and the temple has been destroyed. John receives his prophetic vision, and transcribes it into written form from his prison on the Isle of Patmos probably around AD 81-96. Christians smuggle it out for him bit by bit. The Christian community embraces it, knowing that Israel has already been overrun by the Romans. They hang on every word, circulating the manuscripts, or copies of it for a couple hundred more years, until it becomes part of the New Testament canon.
Is it logical to believe that they would do this if it were simply a history of what had already taken place? They had Josephus for that! Here is a document claiming to be prophecy! It is preposterous to believe that no Christians would have spoken up about the bogusness of this prophetic document if it simply described the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD! I don't know whether Alzheimers existed back then, but if it did, they would have thought John was in its early stages for sure! Mistaking history for prophecy would have been a sure sign! It would have been one of those "Emperor has no clothes" moments.
Christians were very outspoken about heresy, and about preserving their faith. There were deep spiritual implications for getting major things wrong, and they knew it. They had to know by this time that future generations depended on their own faithfulness and accuracy.
We sit in the comfort of our armchairs in our living rooms today, and we try to think outside the box in our evaluations as to what might have happened 1,900 to 2,000 years ago. It is doubtful that we're going to come up with any better explanations than offered by the documents, both Biblical and secular, that were actually written during that era.
BB
The problem with your line of reasoning, BB, is that scholars are virtually unanimous in finding that John, the disciple of Jesus, did not write Revelation. The "Beloved Disciple" is never identified as the author... who actually wrote it is uncertain.
Gavin,
The most available reference which I have at the moment is the notes in my New American Bible, St. Joseph's Edition. Whoever authored the notes appears to be almost embarrassingly honest, much to the chagrin of most Orthodox believers.
Here is a paragraph from the preface to the book of Revelation:
"The author of the book calls himself John (1,1.4.9; 22, 8) who because of his Christian faith has been exiled to the rocky island of Patmos, a Roman penal colony. Although he never claims to be John the apostle, whose name is attached to the fourth gospel, he was so identified by several of the early church Fathers, including Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, and Hippolytus. This identification, however, was denied by other Fathers, including Denis of Alexandria, Eusebius of Caesarea, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen, and John Chrysostom. Indeed, vocabulary, grammar, and style make it doubtful that the book could have been put into its present form by the same person(s) responsible for the fourth gospel. Nevertheless, there are definite linguistic and theological affinities between the two books. The tone of the letters to the seven churches (1,4-3,22) is indicative of the great authority the author enjoyed over the Christian communities in Asia. It is possible, therefore, that he was a disciple of John the apostle, who is traditionally associated with that part of the world. The date of the book in its present form is probably near the end of the reign of Domitian (AD 81-96), a fierce persecutor of the Christians."
**************************
Even if someone else did author the book in 81-96 AD, it could not have been an after the fact "prophecy" of the events of 70 AD. That is really reaching. At the very least, Irenaeus, the main counterer of heresies would have been all over that!
I see probably three points from which this could be argued: The book could be true, and yet to be fulfilled. Or, it could be a warning, which future generations heed, averting the calamitous aspects as did the citizens of Nineveh. Or, some might argue that it is false, not even belonging in the Bible, in which case the prophecies would never come to pass. But, it would have been thrown away as a worthless forgery if those closest to the activity had imagined that its sole purpose was to forecast AD 70, yet written perhaps twenty years after those events had actually taken place. Had it been discarded by the early Fathers, it probably would have surfaced along with the manuscripts at Nag Hammadi in lieu of canonization.
Anyhoo, just my opinions here. Without a doubt it is a fascinating topic. Personally, I really don't emphasize prophecy in my daily life because of the ways in which it was used as a tool of our abuse. If the stuff happens, it happens, and as with many of the other events in life, we'll be there for the ride.
BB
"when we least expect it"
In Dave Pack's latest verbals, he seems set that it will be the Feast of Trumpets*, but year unknown. He's so certain, that if nothing happens on (date of Trumpets) less 1335 days (sometime in January), then check again next year. So he thinks he's got the day, but not the hour or the year (or the century?)
* I understand there is a bunfight between COGs over Trumpets or the first day of Tabernacles as the speculated day of Christ's return.
The thing about Revelation, Bob, is stated in the first three verses. It was to come to pass "shortly" and the time of its fulfillment was "at hand", at that time - 2,000 years ago.
It is terribly kin to at least a hundred passages that expected Jesus' return in the generation of the apostles.
It didn't happen, so face it, it never will. God nowhere in the Bible defers fulfillment of prophecy for this length of time.
It's done, it's over and it's a failed prophecy of the first century. Get over it and get on with your life.
scholars are virtually unanimous in finding that John, the disciple of Jesus, did not write Revelation.
Which is not to say those scholars are in fact correct . . . Arguments from style strongly suggest the author of the Apocalypse was not the same as the author of St. John's Gospel and the three Johannine epistles, but arguments from style can never be conclusive, and the traditional view of most, attested from the first half of the second century onward, is that it was one and the same John who wrote all five books (a position rejected by the Alogi heretics who claimed the five Johannine books were forgeries penned by St. John's nemesis Cerinthus, and by later writers who supposed that John the Apostle was distinct from John the Presbyter).
So.......No one wants to discuss what the Revelation means in an allegorical context?
Nope. Didn't think so.
Personally, I would place considerable weight on the opinion of Irenaeus, who was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John..
I believe that there are logical explanations for such things as grammatical differences, such as age, or editing. It's doubtful that a person could compare one of my essays from my school days with anything I've written in the past ten years, and know that they were both written by the same person.
As far as allegorical stuff goes, sure why not? Been there and done that before. Every possible angle provides additional understanding.
BB
OK, Bob, I'll bite: What is (or was, I guess I should say) your allegorical understanding of the book of Revelation?
Personally, for me, I think it speaks of an apocalypse that the author went through within himself; and the various characters and events in the book are all aspects of his own personality/mind/consciousness/what have you.
Can we, also, apply such allegories to our own selves, and each examine our own self under the harsh light of personal (psychological?) apocalypse, and gain a personal transformation? (I.e., a resurrection, but one from within, not literalized, global, and without.)
I'm not 100% certain the answer to my question is yes. But I am pondering it, a single piece at a time. I wonder, too, if ancient gnostics actually got "the full results", i.e., a complete transformation from such a praxis, or if it was merely meant as an ideal that was to be strived toward, but never expected to be gained?
"It is preposterous to believe that no Christians would have spoken up about the bogusness of this prophetic document if it simply described the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD!"
Why would they have spoken up? They realized it was allegorical, just as much as we realize in the present age that Battlestar Galactica is fiction that reflects the current political and religious climate here on Earth.
Two thousand years later, that particular Christian "message" has been sadly lost in translation. We don't literally believe that any fiction is "true history"; we instead gain insight and knowledge from the metaphors and allegories presented therein.
Now why can't Christians be open-minded enough to look at their own scriptures that way as well?
Oh, wait, that's right: They make a god out of their holy book. Gotcha.
The Revelation is the Revelation of Jesus's return. It tells the story of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple which then leads up to Jesus returning and the resurrection and judgment - beginning in 19:1
From 19:1 to the end of the book is the Revelation. So, it's not simply about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD. It's about the soon coming Jesus.
Sadly for the believers, it didn't happen all these many centuries since then, much less "soon", like the book predicts.
Post a Comment